Back
HARKESH MANUJA
Pawan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Vinod Dutt Sharma – Respondent
HARKESH MANUJA, J.
1. By way of present revision petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 20.05.2023, passed by Rent Controller, Ludhiana, whereby an application filed at the instance of petitioner-tenant seeking permission to send his voice samples to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh for comparing the same with audio/video clip recorded in the pendrive (Ex.R-1/A), was dismissed.
2. In the present case, an eviction petition under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as “1949 Act”) came to be filed by respondent-landlord on the ground of nonpayment of arrears of rent. In the written statement, petitioner-tenant took the stand that the rent was duly paid; on some occasions to the respondent-landlord and on few others to his son. In this regard, petitioner-tenant also relied upon one video-audio recording pertaining to the son of respondent.
3. Post framing of the issues, respondent-landlord appeared as PW-1 and the said video recording in a pendrive was even put to him after the same having been played in Court with due permission. The respondent-landlord denied the petitioner to be the person handing over
The admissibility and relevance of electronic records as documentary evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, and the importance of allowing the comparison of voice samples for substantive evidence.
The court ruled that a tenant's application for forensic analysis became infructuous when the landlord did not pursue the claim for excess rent.
The fundamental right to privacy cannot be construed as absolute and must bow down to compelling public interest. The admissibility of memory card evidence without certification under Section 65-B of....
The right to privacy must bow down to compelling public interest, and certification under Section 65-B of the Act is needed when the recording is to be produced in trial as evidence.
Compliance with statutory evidence requirements is essential for admissibility in proceedings.
A certificate under Section 65-B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act must be issued by the person who had control over the device at the time the original electronic record was created, rather than the per....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the admissibility of recorded conversation and the power of the Court to obtain voice samples of the witnesses under Section 91 of the CrPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
